SSRIs in pregnancy associated with 5 days earlier delivery, 2X PICU likelihood.
More evidence emerging raising alarm regarding bad effects on the baby from mom taking antidepressants during pregnancy.
The new study is: Lund N, Pedersen LH, Henriksen TB.Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitorexposure in utero and pregnancy outcomes. Archives of Pediatrics & AdolescentMedicine. 2009 Oct;163(10):949-54.
For moms taking SSRIs, kids were born five days earlier. Kids who ended up inthe NICU were twice as likely to have moms on antidepressant versus not onantidepressants. Etc.
There are plenty of reasons to blog about this.
Discussing the issue repeatedly, from many angles, can possibly, hopefully,lead to some avoidance of these suspected harmful outcomes. As I have blogged before...
There is an awesome alternative to antidepressant medications in pregnancy.Talk therapy. This intervention has decades of empirical support, including ahost of recent-generation (most recent decades) evidence for efficacy. Itwould take an embarrasingly over-extended stretch of the imagination tohypothesize a risk of harm from talk therapy that is equal to the harm thatseems increaasingly evident.
Another great reason to discuss this issue is because of the vested interestspushing FOR the use of antidepressant medications in pregnancy. This is thetwo leading organizations that should be advocating for SAFE care for moms andthe unborn children: the American Psychiatric Association, and the AmericanCollege of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
At the time when either, or both, ought ot be on the vanguard, comprehendingthe risks and alternatives, these two organizations have jointly combined,WITH FUNDING FRON BIG PHARMA, to advocate for exactly the opposite:medications for depression in pregnancy.
Here is the OFFICIAL, joint APA ACOG statement:
Here is THEIR language where they soft-pedal and downplay talk therapy:
"Pregnant and not currently on medication for depression:Psychotherapy may be beneficial in women who prefer to avoid antidepressantmedication. For women who prefer taking medication, risks and benefits of treatmentchoices should be evaluated and discussed, including factors such as stage ofgestation, symptoms, history of depression, and other conditions andcircumstances (eg, a smoker, difficulty gaining weight)."
---talk therapy, infinitely safer for the baby, is relegated to a condescending "preference," if the little lady insists.
I predict: within two years, this heavily credentialed guideline will be totally up-ended. Totally thrown out.
How can the APA and ACOG make such a glaring mistake?
Follow the money.
"Dr. Yonkers has received a research grant from Eli Lilly this past year. Shehas received study drug from Pfizer for a National Institute of Mental Healthtrial. Dr. Stewart serves on the Advisory Boards of Wyeth and Eli Lilly andBoehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Dell has received research grants from Pfizer hasconsulted to Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Berlex and is on the Speaker'sBureau for Berlex, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Wyeth. Dr. Wisner serves on theSpeaker's Board of Glaxo Smith Klein. Dr. Oberlander; Dr. Ramin; and Drs.Stotland, Chaudron, and Lockwood have no conflicts to disclose."
That is a brief review of the extensive degree of financial relationshipsbetween some of the authors and the drugs that the authors are advocating. Ibelieve I noted in an earlier post: Dr. Wisner has relationships going back at least a couple decades with Big Pharma.
So, take your pick. Meds vs. Therapy. According to paid shills from APA andACOG, meds wins. Until you account for the efficacy of talk therapy, and the horrible side effects, on developing babies in utero, of these antidepressants.